|
|
|
|
| LEADER |
01415nam a2200217Ia 4500 |
| 001 |
10.1007-s13194-022-00459-9 |
| 008 |
220517s2022 CNT 000 0 und d |
| 020 |
|
|
|a 18794912 (ISSN)
|
| 245 |
1 |
0 |
|a An ineffective antidote for hawkmoths
|
| 260 |
|
0 |
|b Springer Science and Business Media B.V.
|c 2022
|
| 856 |
|
|
|z View Fulltext in Publisher
|u https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-022-00459-9
|
| 520 |
3 |
|
|a In recent publications we have drawn attention to the fact that if the dynamics of a model is structurally unstable, then the presence of structural model error places in-principle limits on the model’s ability to generate decision-relevant probability forecasts. Writing with a varying array of co-authors, Eric Winsberg has now produced at least four publications in which he dismisses our points as unfounded; the most recent of these appeared in this journal. In this paper we respond to the arguments of Winsberg and his co-workers, and we point out that their criticisms fail. We take this as an opportunity to restate and explain our arguments, and to point to fruitful directions for future research. © 2022, The Author(s).
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Climate model
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Forecast
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Hawkmoth effect
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Probability
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Projection
|
| 650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Structural model error
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Frigg, R.
|e author
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Smith, L.A.
|e author
|
| 773 |
|
|
|t European Journal for Philosophy of Science
|
